Chris At The Pictures: 2015
Showing posts with label 2015. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2015. Show all posts

Thursday, 28 January 2016

'Tangerine' - Review

1/28/2016 01:10:00 pm
'Tangerine' - Review

★ ★ ★ ★ 

This was my first cinematic experience following the travesty of Dirty Grandpa, a raunchy comedy with its focus – to put it mildly – disastrously askew. I honestly couldn’t have picked a better antidote: here’s a whip-smart, insightful yet gorgeously mouthy romp that knows how to balance the fair and the foul. 

Through the lens of an iPhone 5 (enhanced with an anamorphic attachment), we follow trans sex workers Sin-dee (Kitana Kiki Rodriguez) and Alexandra (Mya Taylor) across the bleached streets of sunset boulevard on Christmas Eve. Sin-dee is on the hunt for her cheating pimp/boyfriend, while Alexandra attempts to draw punters to a gig. 

As we encounter the various inhabitants of the strip in Sin-dee’s wake, there’s certainly laughter aplenty (car washes and donuts will never look quite the same again), but it’s the small touches of melancholy that give it the edge over more mainstream fare. Our two leads are shriekingly amiable, and there’s even some humour to be found in the pitfalls of their clients and nemeses. A stomping soundtrack pelts us through the narrative at break-neck pace but knows when to fade away for the gentler moments.

The smartphone cinematography looks startlingly brilliant on the big-screen, with massive implications for the future of independent cinema, and the wonderful reaction to the starring duo proves once again to the nay-sayers of Hollywood that if you create compelling characters, audiences will miss their company when the credits roll regardless of gender, sexuality or race.

Despite star power, a mega-budget and top-of-the-line tech, Dirty Grandpa doesn’t deserve to occupy the same city, let alone cinema, as Tangerine. This is a rip-roaring, eye-watering jaunt that shines with wit, relevance and buoyancy from screaming start to heartfelt finish.

Tuesday, 19 January 2016

'The Revenant' - Review

1/19/2016 06:33:00 pm
'The Revenant' - Review

★ ★ ★ ½ 

Our constant companion throughout The Revenant (Alejandro González Iñàrritu’s tale of a left-for-dead frontiersman) is the harsh, wounded breathing of Leonardo DiCaprio’s Hugh Glass. Mutilated in a savage bear attack and abandoned by rival and fellow pelt-hauler John Fitzgerald (Tom Hardy), Glass begins an odyssey across the frozen wastes of the West, seeking vengeance. 

The recurring motif of Glass rising after yet another rough night under the stars perfectly encapsulates the strengths and weaknesses of the film. Despite the baggage of gobsmacking on-set reports and Oscar fever, DiCaprio’s performance is startlingly captivating, often rendering one of Hollywood’s most famous faces unrecognisable behind a beard matted with blood, mud and snot. As reluctant as I am to cave to award voters’ fawning for transformative performances, there’s no denial that this portrayal is anything less than sublime. For what must constitute 80% of the run-time, Leo crawls, chokes and chews his way across stunning landscapes, at once distracting from and contributing to the savage backdrop. 

And what extraordinary savagery it is, too: not since Gareth Evan’s follow-up to The Raid has cinematic pain been so viscerally convincing. A heart-thumping battle sequence followed closely by the bear brawl set us off at a sprint before grinding to a gritty, grimy crawl. This is where the problem with our constant focus on Glass comes into play: a very grumpy man waking up in the woods can only be entertaining so many times, and the endless repetition of grumbling into scummy beard, crawling a few paces, sleeping in a horse carcass etc. drags the centre section of the film into a dangerous gutter. As with Iñàrritu’s Birdman, the twenty minutes that inspire much watch-checking and fidgeting is the clumsy ink smudge on an otherwise unsullied work.

Reference to the cinematic frame as a painting is also applicable to Emmanuel Lubezki’s cinematography. His usual penchant for long, winding takes is dotted about the piece, but far more impressive are the moments when the camera is allowed a moment of stillness, to take in exquisite vistas of looming mountain ranges and biting, jet-black rivers. Some compositions are so ingeniously striking that I’m certain no-one has ever imagined anything like them: take, for example, a shot that places us within wisps of cloud, reminded of our lofty position above and beyond Glass’s plight as he drifts between the rage of his waking hours or the calm lucidness of his recurring daydreams. 

I’m not entirely convinced that any of these surreal outcroppings actually have anything important to say about human nature and how far we are willing to go for the sake of survival, vengeance, or both, but as long as they’re so wondrously mounted, I’m quite happy to go the distance.

With DiCaprio’s much pined-for Oscar pretty much a dead cert at this point, recognition of other great turns in the film is massively lacking to the point of negligence. Hardy has sported roles like this before, and his overwrought southern accent distracts from the great supporting work being done by Domhnall Gleeson as Glass’s sympathetic superior officer. Will Poulter also does well in a role which finally allowed me to see more of his talent and less of his eyebrows. In the midst of a film so often obsessed with unwashed hair, soggy fur and torn fabrics, this is not something to be undervalued. For all the muscular violence, ice-cold tone and stark imagery, the character-driven elements of The Revenant are what push it above a mere endurance test and into the realm of warm-blooded, human storytelling.

Sunday, 10 January 2016

'The Hateful Eight' - Review

1/10/2016 07:29:00 pm
'The Hateful Eight' - Review



 ★ ★  ☆

Quentin Tarantino is admired by many as an adventurous director, someone who never lets himself feel trapped by the traditional constraints of narrative film-making, but if you’ve been following his career closely, you’ll often find he’s been directing ‘by-the-numbers’ for a long while. This manifests in several forms, be it the obsessive cataloguing of the films he’s proud of as ‘The xth Film by Quentin Tarantino’ or referring to sequels as ‘Volume 2’. Even the project he likes to write out of his history is titled Four Rooms. His latest film, The Hateful Eight, arrives adorned with similar legends: ‘The 8th Film…’, ‘see it in 70mm!’ etc. 

Sticking with the numerical theme, the questions I wanted answered going into the film were limited to just two: 

1) Would the super-wide, 70mm Panavision lend itself well to what is essentially a bunch of people grumbling at each other in a hut?

2) Is there some justification for the three hour-plus running time besides pure self-indulgence?

Personally, the answer to both queries was a resounding ‘no’, but that’s certainly not the be-all and end-all of the experience. 

First, the set-up: we open in the dead of winter in Wyoming, post-civil war. Bounty hunter John Ruth (Kurt Russell) and prisoner Daisy Domergue (Jennifer Jason Leigh) wend their way towards Red Rock, where the latter is set to face the rope. They are joined by Major Marcus Warren (Samuel L. Jackson) and soon-to-be Sherriff Chris Mannix (Walton Goggins) before taking refuge from the approaching blizzard in Minnie’s Haberdashery. Inside, they are confronted by a host of deceitful characters, one or more of whom secretly plan to spring Domergue. And with that, the stage is set for a sinewy, snowbound game of Cluedo, where the smallest detail and movement cannot escape scrutiny as each patron and their every move are placed under the watchful eyes of Ruth, Warren and Mannix.

Admittedly, the very idea of post-nineties Quentin Tarantino heading up a self-contained story relying heavily on small signifiers seems about as natural as Brian Blessed crooning a lullaby, and is often just as subtle. Yep, that means shrieked expletives aplenty! The post-civil war setting could feasibly lend itself to a narrative thick with relevance, but one feels more often than not that any comment on race-relations is suffocated by showboating. The deliberately outrageous, black-versus-white nattering comes to a head with a typically grim and grotesque story told by Major Warren to embittered general Smithers (Bruce Dern acting everyone else off the screen with his eyes alone).

Jackson slips into his commanding role as if taking a seat in his favourite armchair and Russell carries himself with rough-hewn charisma, but the limelight is snatched feverishly by Leigh as Domergue, spitting out great hunks of scenery from between her toothy witch’s gape. Goggins’ southern drawl garners a smattering of laughs early on, before the comedy crown is swiped by Tim Roth, sporting a British accent so ludicrous it makes the Queen resemble a cockney.

The much-advertised 70mm cinematography, far from framing the haberdashery and its occupants as an all-encompassing eye taking in a stage-play (indeed, the first performance of the screenplay was itself a stage reading) refuses to stop fidgeting. We flit from the face of one actor to another as they spew forth one outrageous line after the next, or simply circle the proceedings as a partially interested bystander.

The fast and loose emphasis on framing, character and dialogue permeates the first half: ninety minutes seem to crawl by. Rather than the spicy back-and-forth and quick-fire taste for blood we expect, the initial chapters are weirdly slack and occasionally dull, giving us an inscrutable build right up until Warren’s tale: the very epicentre of the film. Before…WHAM! Cut to the intermission.

When we pick up the story with a catch-up narration from the director himself, it’s almost as if the Tarantino who sent us to sleep in Deathproof and stretched Inglorious Basterds way past its due takes a shotgun blast to the chest. His body is kicked aside by his younger, fiercer self to make way for a second half that has everything we actually wanted: there’s tension, excitement, intrigue, a furious race to the finish line and before we know it the last hour has raced by in a sea of blood, sweat and fear. Agatha Christie meets Wes Craven, essentially. 

All the pretence of holier-than-thou, film geek prestige melts away and the Quentin we all know and love shines through…I only wish it hadn’t taken an hour and a half to do so. As a singular piece, The Hateful Eight serves as a passable romp, but more effectively as a showcase of a director at his best and worst.

Wednesday, 23 December 2015

The Worst Films of 2015

12/23/2015 10:36:00 am
The Worst Films of 2015


Note: these are based on UK release dates

10. Sinister 2 – The beigest movie ever.

Worst bit: That by technicality, I have to call it a ‘horror’ movie

Full review here


9. Jupiter Ascending – That was your last chance, Wachowskis, and you royally blew it.

Worst bit: “Bees can sense royalty”

Full review here


8. Seventh Son – Oh, great, another teen franchise based on a boo-zzzzzZZZZZZZZZZ

Worst bit: Jeff Bridges trying to speak English

Full review here


7. Taken 3 – Remember when Liam Neeson punching foreigners was fun? The film-makers didn’t.

Worst bit: Forest Whitaker’s evil rubber-band

Full review here


6. Knock Knock ­– Keanu Reeves is Nicolas Cage.

Worst bit: Eli Roth is still making films

Full review here


5. Fantastic Four – I’ve never seen a movie more determined to kill itself.

Worst bit: The spark of a good idea being snuffed out

Full review here


4. Mortdecai – Enough to make you run home and shave your whole body.

Worst bit: It’s a hard choice between Johnny Depp, Johnny Depp and Johnny bloody Depp

Full review here


3. Solace – Forgot this existed? I think the actors have, too.

Worst bit: Not sure, it probably happened while I was asleep

Full review here


2. Pixels – A corporate product wearing the freshly harvested skin of an innocent short film.

Worst bit: Too many to choose from, so just draw up a chart of every scene and throw a dart.

Full review here


1. Paranormal Activity: The Ghost Dimension 3D – I know what you’re thinking: “Really, it’s not worth getting that annoyed about, is it?”…you didn’t have to watch it.

Worst bit: Active extortion of the audience.

Full review here